G De-Deus1, F G Belladonna1, A S Zuolo1, D M Cavalcante1, J C A Carvalhal1, M Simões-Carvalho1, E M Souza2, R T Lopes3, E J N L Silva4. 1. Department of Endodontics, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 2. Department of Dentistry II, Federal University of Maranhão, São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil. 3. Nuclear Engineering Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 4. Department of Endodontics, Grande Rio University, Duque de Caxias, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the performance of XP-endo Finisher R instruments when removing root filling remnants from oval-shaped canals using microcomputed tomographic (micro-CT) imaging as the analytical tool. Passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) was used as a reference technique for comparison. METHODOLOGY: Twenty mandibular incisors with oval-shaped canals were matched based on similar anatomic features of the canal (volume, aspect ratio and 3D configuration) after scanning procedures. The canals were prepared with Reciproc R25 instruments, filled with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer using the single-cone technique and retreated up to a Reciproc R40 instrument. After retreatment procedures, the specimens were rescanned, and the homogeneity between the specimens, the oval-shaped anatomy and the remaining filling material were confirmed. The pair-matched samples were assigned to two experimental groups (n = 10), according to the supplementary approach used: XP-endo Finisher R or PUI. Each sample was scanned after each endodontic procedure. The volume of remaining root filling material was quantified before and after the use of each supplementary approach. This analysis was performed considering the total canal (Student t-test) and also by thirds (anova procedure followed by a Bonferroni correction). Data were analysed statistically with a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: The volume of root filling material at baseline was similar between the groups (t-test, P = 0.787). XP-endo Finisher R removed significantly more root filling material compared to PUI (t-test, P = 0.015), as it removed a mean of ≅32% material compared to 12% for the PUI. There was no difference in the amount of root filling material removed in the root canal thirds after using both supplementary approaches (one-way anova, P = 0.07 for XP-endo Finisher R and P = 0.886 for PUI). CONCLUSIONS: Both supplementary approaches significantly reduced the volume of remaining root filling material from oval-shaped canals. The XP-endo Finisher R instrument removed significantly more root filling material than PUI. None of the supplementary approaches was able to render oval-shaped canals completely free from remaining root filling material.
AIM: To evaluate the performance of XP-endo Finisher R instruments when removing root filling remnants from oval-shaped canals using microcomputed tomographic (micro-CT) imaging as the analytical tool. Passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) was used as a reference technique for comparison. METHODOLOGY: Twenty mandibular incisors with oval-shaped canals were matched based on similar anatomic features of the canal (volume, aspect ratio and 3D configuration) after scanning procedures. The canals were prepared with Reciproc R25 instruments, filled with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer using the single-cone technique and retreated up to a Reciproc R40 instrument. After retreatment procedures, the specimens were rescanned, and the homogeneity between the specimens, the oval-shaped anatomy and the remaining filling material were confirmed. The pair-matched samples were assigned to two experimental groups (n = 10), according to the supplementary approach used: XP-endo Finisher R or PUI. Each sample was scanned after each endodontic procedure. The volume of remaining root filling material was quantified before and after the use of each supplementary approach. This analysis was performed considering the total canal (Student t-test) and also by thirds (anova procedure followed by a Bonferroni correction). Data were analysed statistically with a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: The volume of root filling material at baseline was similar between the groups (t-test, P = 0.787). XP-endo Finisher R removed significantly more root filling material compared to PUI (t-test, P = 0.015), as it removed a mean of ≅32% material compared to 12% for the PUI. There was no difference in the amount of root filling material removed in the root canal thirds after using both supplementary approaches (one-way anova, P = 0.07 for XP-endo Finisher R and P = 0.886 for PUI). CONCLUSIONS: Both supplementary approaches significantly reduced the volume of remaining root filling material from oval-shaped canals. The XP-endo Finisher R instrument removed significantly more root filling material than PUI. None of the supplementary approaches was able to render oval-shaped canals completely free from remaining root filling material.